looking for a macro lens

[Eildosa]

Hello,

I own a 600D with a stock 15-55 mm, recently I acquired a Tamron 18-200mm XR DiII Macro.
However since the minimal focusing distance of the tamron is much higher than the stock 18-55mm I get the same shots at 55mm with my stock lens and 200mm with my Tamron.

Would any of you know a good lens allowing me to photograph really small stuff from really close?

Thanks.

[Saorsa]

How much macro and close-up work do you intend to do? Is this a certain pursuit or something you would like to try out?

The best answer is a dedicated Macro lens but if all you want to do is experiment there are other options.

Extension tubes allow you to get closer to a subject by extending the lens forward from the body. This will cause some loss of light but if you have extension tubes that include the wiring for control you can still use the automatic functions of the camera.

Close-up lenses or filters (positive diopter, achromatic) attach to the front of the lens and increase magnification. The best of these have at least two elements and are a bit more expensive than the single element. The Canon versions of these are the 250D and 500D and will work with your existing lenses although you might need a step up or down ring.

Using either of these means that you lose infinity focus and they need to be taken on or off if you are out for a casual shoot.

Another possibility with more general applicability is a teleconverter. These retain the original minimum focus distance of the lens but increase magnification and allow continuous focus to infinity.

Hope it helps.

[DanK]

Can you please modify your profile to include your real name and location? thanks.

In addition to Brian's question, I would ask what small things you want to photograph. It makes a difference.

If you buy a dedicated macro lens (these are all prime lenses, despite the "macro" added to the name of some zooms): virtually all dedicated macro lenses are very sharp. The differ in other respects. The first decision in my book would be focal length, and that is determined in large part by what you intend to focus. For example, a 60mm lens is just fine for photographing flowers, but it is harder than a longer lens to use with bugs because of the even shorter minimum working distance.

[Inkanyezi]

If the intended use is the eye photography mentioned in your other post, any macro lens will be well suited to the task, but it may also be done with a far simpler lens, as for example an enlarging lens with no focusing mechanism and a proper mount to fix it to the correct distance on the camera. Then what is needed is for example an EL Nikkor 80 mm and a set of extension rings with 39 mm thread and an adapter for 39 mm thread to the camera.

[inkista]

It might also help if you told us which camera body you're shooting with. No point in recommending Canon lenses if you're a Nikon shooter.

With Macro lenses, unfortunately, you need to look for more than just "Macro" on the lens name--as you've found out with your Tamron, it doesn't always mean what you think it should mean. The specification you'll be looking for on any macro lens is the magnification. A "true" macro lens is one that has 1:1 magnification--that is, the ratio of the size of the image on the sensor is equal to the size of the object in real life. If you look at the specs for your 18-200, the magnification is given as 1:4--that is, the closest you can get is to have the size of the image on the sensor be 1/4 that of the object's actual size, which is why you can't get particularly close.

There are specialty lenses that can increase the magnification to be greater than 1:1 (e.g., Canon MP-E 65mm f/2.8 Macro, which can do up to 5:1 magnification), but these cost a bomb.

The "poor man's macro" methods (extension tubes, close-up filters, reversed lenses) can also be combined with a macro lens to increase the magnification, so it's never a waste to try them first, if macro shooting is going to be a major thing for you.

[Eildosa]

Allright sorry, forgot a lot of usefull information.

I want to photograph iris (from the eyes) with no reflection (but thats an other problem) to use them as texture in video games, it must be as sharp as possible.

I want the iris to take the whole field of view and be as shap as posible, worst case scenario I can take multiple shot while moving the light and then compose a flawless, reflection free iris.

With my tamron or stock lens the iris is only taking like 20% of the shot.

Shooting with a canon 600D.

I'm willing to spend up to 600€ for the lens, I'll buy it on a second hand website (my tamron costed me 60€)

ps : I am an IT engineer, so I'm lacking a lot of technical knowlege from photograpy. what does 1:1 magnification means? that the shot will look like the same thing that my eyes see?

[Inkanyezi]

Assuming the diameter of the iris to be around ½", somewhat less than 13 mm, and the sensor height of a Canon crop camera slightly larger, a trifle less than 15 mm, with a reproduction of 1:1, you will have a margin of maybe 1,5 mm above and under the iris. Hence any 1:1 macro will be suitable.

I would suggest the Tamron 90 mm macro, as you might find it at a bargain (also older models will be quite OK), and if you want slightly larger reproduction scale, you can add an extension tube.

[chauncey]

You sound like you might benefit from a dedicated Canon site...http://photography-on-the.net/forum/
They have a stellar macro section therein.

[inkista]

...what does 1:1 magnification means? that the shot will look like the same thing that my eyes see?

From my earlier post, if the magnification ratio is 1:1 that means:

...the size of the image on the sensor is equal to the size of the object in real life.

A 600D sensor is 22.3mm x 14.9mm. So, with a 1:1 macro lens, you can fill the frame with any object that's 22.3mm x 14.9mm. With a 1:4 macro lens, you can only fill the frame with an object that's 89.2mmx59.6mm.

[inkista]

You sound like you might benefit from a dedicated Canon site...http://photography-on-the.net/forum/....

Except they're not Canon-dedicated any more...

[Loose Canon]

Not to do with what lens you should or shouldn’t purchase?

I would be surprised if you could shoot a “flawless, reflection free iris”.

At close up 1:1 distances and dead on straight in front of the iris, you may (will) have to deal with the reflection of the camera/lens/photographer in the eye.

[Eildosa]

Not to do with what lens you should or shouldn’t purchase?

I would be surprised if you could shoot a “flawless, reflection free iris”.

At close up 1:1 distances and dead on straight in front of the iris, you may (will) have to deal with the reflection of the camera/lens/photographer in the eye.

I'm going to use cross polarisation in order to remove the reflections.

Allright then, I will search for a 1:1 macro lens.

[Inkanyezi]

I'm going to use cross polarisation in order to remove the reflections.

Cross polarisation will subdue the reflection of the light source, but does nothing to other reflections, so still there will be an image of the camera and maybe also the photographer in the center, the highest part of the cornea, above the pupil. The farther away you have the camera, its reflection will become smaller and perhaps fall outside the depth of field.

Covering camera and photographer in black, or placing yourself at the side, could help for those reflections.

[Mike Buckley]

See this for a relatively inexpensive macro lens that provides 2:1 magnification. However, notice that it has no automatic aperture, which I don't think will be an issue in the shooting situation you described.

[Saorsa]

You can pick up a used Canon 60mm f2.8 macro on ebay for about the price of that Venus and it will go to 1:1 with full automatic operation.

[Eildosa]

You can pick up a used Canon 60mm f2.8 macro on ebay for about the price of that Venus and it will go to 1:1 with full automatic operation.

On the other hand the venus makes beautiful shots, I might buy it.

[Saorsa]

Every lens I own takes beautiful shots. I just mess up a lot of them.

[Mike Buckley]

Every lens I own takes beautiful shots. I just mess up a lot of them.

I thought it was just me!

[Saorsa]

Well, actually, I was just kidding. It is just you. I never mess up a shot.

Every single image is perfectly timed, framed and exposed having absolutely no need for post processing.

[Loose Canon]

Gorgeous grass image Brian!

Shame that bird thing flew by at just the wrong moment!

Guess you could always crop?